3 ms·
I do not think this is correct, at least for most of the sub-fields of computer science and physics. Prestigious conferences and journals invite only well known
by zzz95 9y ago
I do not think this is correct, at least for most of the sub-fields of computer science and physics. Prestigious conferences and journals invite only well known researchers to review, who are mostly professors. Few post-docs get invited. Each paper gets multiple reviews (3-5), and conflicting reviews get discussed making the review process quite rigorous.
Reviewing a paper is mostly charity and gets you nothing in return, except the fact that when you submit a paper, someone will do the same. It does not help in the Green Card process at all, or boosts your academic credentials.
Regarding overworked professors, they are allowed to delegate reviews internally to students to ease the time they have to spend.
- wfunction 9y ago> I do not think this is correct, at least for most of the sub-fields of computer science and physics. Prestigious conferences and journals invite only well known researchers to review, who are mostly professors. Few post-docs get invited. What about PhDs? You've never seen PhDs review papers in CS? It happens for prestigious conferences too.
- seanmcdirmid 9y agoCS is diverse in field cultures but ya. You don't even need a PhD to be on a PC, but usually every field has a crowd of reviewers that defines it by constantly being on PCs.
- 88e282102ae2e5b 9y agoIt seems that for the glamor journals in biology it definitely is broken, at least for click-baity manuscripts like this. This paper was immediately shat upon by everyone in my department. There's a running joke often said when things like this crop up: 'just because it's in Cell/Nature/Science doesn't mean it's false".
- jacquesm 9y agoExperience in CS, Math or Physics does not necessarily carry over to other branches of science.